The Campaign To Make You Care About Climate Change Is Failing Miserably

[Sonny Clark]

Scientific consensus. F=ma and a great many other such things. There is general scientific consensus on evolution, and there is scientific consensus on the causes of climate change.

Every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University in the world has policy statements that say that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

Those in denial are obese junkies on the AM radio, and fake British Lords. Yet you fools go with the latter.

A matter of opinion.

I see. So you state that F=Ma is a matter of opinion?

The basis of the AGW theory is based on the absorption spectra of the GHG's. Those were first measured by Tyndall in 1858. The first quantification of the Greenhouse effect was done by Savante Arrnhenius in 1896, and his prediction for the temperature increase from a doubling of CO2 was pretty accurate for the tools he had.

No, scientfic theories are not matters of opinion. They are based on scientific laws, observations, and evidence from those observations.

I'm saying that climate change is normal and natural, and has been for millions of years now. And, we'll continue to see climate change for millions of years if this Earth remains Earth. The climate changes every minute of every day. Seasons change. Weather is not a constant. Yes, man made effects do happen, and has happened every since man has been on this Earth. Cutting down the trees, farming the land, burning coal and other energies, chemical plants, agriculture products, etc. another pollutants effect the climate to a degree. But, whether all of that takes place or not, the climate is in constant change.

It's a matter of opinion as to the degree of climate change that's caused by man. In other words, how much is caused by normal and nature events, and how much is actually caused by man. How much is caused by volcanos, draughts, floods, artic blast of extreme cold, temperature changes in the oceans, cloud cover, winds, rain, forest fires, etc.? Has anyone every positively defined all possible causes, their effects, and to what degree each plays in the grand scheme of things? Does everyone that studies the climate agree? Are there undeniable, undisputable facts that can be attached to each claim, whether pro or con? Which scientists are right and which scientists are wrong? So, again, it's all a matter of opinion at this stage of the game.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Do you not know the AGWCult theory?

So you don't understand pressure, volume, temperature, mass and ppm therefore deflect away from questions that expose that?

The AGWCult "Theory" (I use the term loosely) is that a 120PPM increase in CO2 will cause a 2 to 7 (or more) degree increase in Earth temperature, but they never show any lab work

Not Once

So to help the hard of thinking, like yourself, the experiment should be 2 containers each 80% nitrogen, 19% Oxygen and them Argon, water vapor and finally that laggard CO2 which measure 280PPM in one and 400 in the other.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And no predictions of disaster have come to pass.

What disaster have climate scientists predicted?

Snow is a thing of the past

The Ice caps will be totally gone...

etc

 

[Sonny Clark]

A matter of opinion.

Which bit?

Which bit of what?

 

[mudwhistle]

As the changes in climate accelerate, and more people are harmed by those changes, a political debt will be payed by those that pandered to willfull ignorance.

Nearly 40% of americans don`t believe in Evolution either. Being ignorant is one thing but the OP thinks it`s a badge of honor. We no longer have a president that foreigners laugh at but they still have us.

Before, we had a president that foreigners laughed at because our press made fun of him. Foreigners never liked us anyway.

Now we have a president foreigners hate and laugh at at the same time. At least Bush was a lovable buffoon. There's nothing lovable about Obama.

Bush was a "lovable buffoon? Try murderous buffoon who`s living his life in exile.
The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder Vincent Bugliosi 8601419748136 Amazon.com Books

Yeah, ....right.

Living in plain sight in Dallas.

So much for your hyperbole.

 

[mudwhistle]

And no predictions of disaster have come to pass.

What disaster have climate scientists predicted?

Snow is a thing of the past

The Ice caps will be totally gone...

etc

Two feet of snow this year in Tennessee.

The ice caps must have shifted to the United States.

 

[cnm]

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

Climate change It s even worse than we thought - New Scientist

So this is one disaster that hasn't yet come to pass. Maybe that's because it's a prediction for the future.

World leaders had previously agreed on a target of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

Beyond that point, "impacts will begin to be unacceptably severe," the authors wrote. (Quiz: What You Don't Know About Climate Science.)​

I'm not going to bother looking up the other future predictions that haven't yet come to pass.

 

[cnm]

So to help the hard of thinking, like yourself, the experiment should be 2 containers each 80% nitrogen, 19% Oxygen and them Argon, water vapor and finally that laggard CO2 which measure 280PPM in one and 400 in the other.

To what point? You haven't a clue what you're talking about, have you?

I can tell because I lab teched in a section of a lab measuring the amount of pollution a pulp and paper mill was putting out.

You keep missing basic concepts so that your questions or supposed questions are meaningless.

 

[cnm]

Snow is a thing of the past

The Ice caps will be totally gone...

etc

From climate scientists? Snow will be rare in the UK in one interview. How is that a disaster?
Which climate scientist predicted the ice caps will be totally gone by now?

But enough Gish Galloping for one day. It's not as if you won't be repeating the same ignorant bullshit tomorrow.

 

[SAYIT]

And no predictions of disaster have come to pass.

What disaster have climate scientists predicted?

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

Climate change It s even worse than we thought - New Scientist


Look I do not deny the climate changes.
I do not deny that the earth is trending slightly warmer
I do not deny that people and the pollution they produce impact the climate

I just don't think it's a harbinger of biblical disaster.

I find it particularly ironic that those who are all trusting the science seem to dismiss nuclear power as an option.

Nukes are the best option for large scale emission free power that we have

I must admit I prefer water and geothermal generated power.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You have to love the denialists tactics. They find some idiotic goofball making dingbat predictions, then attribute those predictions to real scientists that never said any such thing.

Here is what our leading climate scientist said 34 years ago;

Pubs.GISS Hansen et al. 1981 Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide

Publication Abstracts
Hansen et al. 1981
Hansen, J., D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff, P. Lee, D. Rind, and G. Russell, 1981: Climate impact of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. Science, 213, 957-966, doi:10.1126/science.213.4511.957.

The global temperature rose 0.2°C between the middle 1960s and 1980, yielding a warming of 0.4°C in the past century. This temperature increase is consistent with the calculated effect due to measured increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Variations of volcanic aerosols and possibly solar luminosity appear to be primary causes of observed fluctuations about the mean trend of increasing temperature. It is shown that the anthropogenic carbon dioxide warming should emerge from the noise level of natural climate variability by the end of the century, and there is a high probability of warming in the 1980s. Potential effects on climate in the 21st century include the creation of drought-prone regions in North America and central Asia as part of a shifting of climatic zones, erosion of the West Antarctic ice sheet with a consequent worldwide rise in sea level, and opening of the fabled Northwest Passage

Now we are less than 15 years into the 21st century, so, have with seen an increase in droughts in the drought prone areas of North America and central Asia? Have we seen the Northwest Passage open up a couple of times? Have we seen the erosian of the West Anarctica ice sheet, and an accelerating rise in sea level?

Not only all of that, but much more.

Your cult predicted everything from ice to droughts to floods and fires.

 

[Darkwind]

Climate change is consistently on the bottom of the list of the concerns of US citizens.

I'm all for conservation (because it saves money) and consuming less pollutants I can do that without all the fear mongering and predictions of biblical disasters

Oh, come on...Not even one flood?

 

[Stephanie]

thank GAWD. these commie bastard politicians going around calling people stupid names like, DENIERS and wailing how we (humans) are DESTROYING mother earth and the sky is falling day in and day out, If we don't give them our monies so they FIX IT with their magic wands or something. and now they came out with how there is a WHOLE NETWORK of deniers trying to take them down...my gawd who takes these people SERIOUSLY?

 

[ralfy]

The problem isn't the normal cycle of climate change but the forcing factor of CO2 ppm. More details are given not only in the NAS report but even an independent study funded by skeptics:

Bombshell Koch-Funded Study Finds Global Warming Is Real On The High End And Essentially All Due To Carbon Pollution ThinkProgress

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Snow is a thing of the past

The Ice caps will be totally gone...

etc

From climate scientists? Snow will be rare in the UK in one interview. How is that a disaster?
Which climate scientist predicted the ice caps will be totally gone by now?

But enough Gish Galloping for one day. It's not as if you won't be repeating the same ignorant bullshit tomorrow.

I don't consider AGWCult to be scientists, but after Katrina, your guys predicted cat 5 hurricanes would be frequent occurrence and there have been none

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The problem isn't the normal cycle of climate change but the forcing factor of CO2 ppm. More details are given not only in the NAS report but even an independent study funded by skeptics:

Bombshell Koch-Funded Study Finds Global Warming Is Real On The High End And Essentially All Due To Carbon Pollution ThinkProgress

Odd that the 800,000 year data set at Vostok it shows zero zippo Nada no forcing at all

 

[Skull Pilot]

New Climate Change Report Warns of Dire Consequences

Climate change It s even worse than we thought - New Scientist

So this is one disaster that hasn't yet come to pass. Maybe that's because it's a prediction for the future.

World leaders had previously agreed on a target of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

Beyond that point, "impacts will begin to be unacceptably severe," the authors wrote. (Quiz: What You Don't Know About Climate Science.)​

I'm not going to bother looking up the other future predictions that haven't yet come to pass.

RAHN The global-warming apocalypses that didn t happen - Washington Times

 

[Skull Pilot]

Climate change is consistently on the bottom of the list of the concerns of US citizens.

I'm all for conservation (because it saves money) and consuming less pollutants I can do that without all the fear mongering and predictions of biblical disasters

Oh, come on...Not even one flood?

Floods have always happened just like wild fires

In the past (colder temps) before it was settled the west burned all the time

 

[BullKurtz]

The whole charade was based on "carbon credits"...a scam by algore to enrich himself while consuming more electricity and fuel than ten average Americans. I have to admit it's been quite successful getting grant money to losers from American university professors to PBS propagandists. Hell, NASA even got in on the act to keep afloat before admitting the warming trend ended almost ten years ago.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So to help the hard of thinking, like yourself, the experiment should be 2 containers each 80% nitrogen, 19% Oxygen and them Argon, water vapor and finally that laggard CO2 which measure 280PPM in one and 400 in the other.

To what point? You haven't a clue what you're talking about, have you?

I can tell because I lab teched in a section of a lab measuring the amount of pollution a pulp and paper mill was putting out.

You keep missing basic concepts so that your questions or supposed questions are meaningless.

Honey, taking McDonald fries out of the hot oil does not make you a "Lab tech"

The AGWCult "theory" (it isn't really a theory) states that a 120PPM increase in CO2 will cause a measurable increase in temperature. How much?

Any answer other than an integer means you're lying or stupid or like Crick both lying and stupid